We can go back to before recorded history for this one - no one really knows.

After all, the Mongols hated everyone, and sent hordes to conquer. If you didn't join them, they hated you to death. And obviously, they were not the first, just an example of hatred in action.

Even the in Bible, which goes long before the Koran, God hated evil acts. And the Koran, not to be left out, hated the Jews, Christians, infidels, etc. And, in fact to this day, they still practice this hatred. And they lie about it.

When Karl Marx wrote his Manifesto, it was clear the he had no love for the political and economic arrangements in the world; he wanted to propose a form of Utopia that would share everyone's wealth with all. The problem with that is that any nation or group that has tried to use that formula for success has failed.

Historical fact. Even China today has abandoned the pure communism/socialism structure, and has opened grudgingly to capitalism.

But let's face it: It sounds good. Too bad it just isn't good.

Russia tried it in 1917, when they took over and set up the USSR. That lasted just over seventy years before it collapsed. And look at all the natural resources they had. Instead, whole swaths of their population died because of hatred. And I'm not talking just about speech here. Had they been capitalistic and freer with ownership of private property, they might well have been the first world power instead of the USA. Even Great Britain, France, Spain, Germany had all spread worldwide conquests owing to free ownership of property, but they gave it up for reasons of corruption, mismanagement, conquests that resulted in revolts, etc., or simply lost in wars.

But so far, no real "hate speech". Patience, I'll get to it shortly.

The Beatniks and Hippies in the 1950s and 1960s tried it with their "communes" and "free love". They both decried "the man" and "the establishment" for putting their efforts down. That went nowhere fast, didn't it? But they also hated the established government authority over them.

Here's the problem with "hate speech": It leads to censorship of thinking. Don't think! Have no opinion lest you be found out and ostracized! You know, the novel "1984", which predicted a good thirty years too soon the events which we are experiencing today. Today, thought police are in full swing - it's called "political correctness" or "PC". And if you disagree, you are guilty of hate speech.

That is nothing more than an attempt to control your thoughts by calling anything and everything you say as an opinion "hate speech".

As far as I am concerned, hate speech is nothing more than an opinion. After all, if I called out every person who used racist, sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic, etc. writings and talking points, I'd be calling everyone "hateful" and guilty of uttering hate speech. So what if someone calls me "cracker" or "white trash" or whatever. How different are those terms to "nigger", "wetback" or "gringo"? Tack on "infidel" and you know that whoever says that actually wants you dead, because it is written in their "holy book" that infidels should be taxed out of existence, made slaves or killed.

Darn. Just committed "hate speech" by mentioning what the PC police will call "Islamophobia".

How about I call out every person who disparagingly calls me "Scumslime" or other names for identifying hate speech, because that is exactly what they are doing. And, yes, I will respond in kind because pushing hateful words toward me will get a response. You don't like it, then be polite. Otherwise, the war of hateful words is ON. And on this page, believe me, your post will be promptly deleted. I strongly dislike hate speech, and I don't have to take your hatred. On other pages, I will simply ignore you for the most part. But perhaps not anymore. I think I'll start a campaign to call out all hateful persons when they put down hate speech, and hold them up for all to see just how hateful they really are. After all, if they cannot debate, they resort to name calling, and that is just another form of hate speech, isn't it?

How about the MAGA hats? Isn't the outrage of some people who see those hats and get violent showing hate speech WITH ACTS to back up their hatred?

The latest news comes from Europe: If you mention "illegal migration" or other named words (and this includes the media, mind you), you can now be prosecuted and go to jail. I'm sure glad there is a first amendment right here in the USA, but if the Democrats and liberals have their way, that will be out the window as soon as they can legislate it. They no longer refer to the USA as a "republic", but a "democracy". It was never set up that way by the Founding Fathers, but the liberals and Democrats are in fact trying their best to convert the USA to a democracy in order to convert it to socialism, which is just one step away from communism and anarchy. You'll have no more rights to speak your mind, defend your homes and family, nor will you be afforded due process of law. And anything you say WILL be used against you, no court needed. Open your eyes, because it is well on its way to being a fact.

Take the Kavanaugh hearings: He was declared guilty by the Democrats, the news media and other liberals, and they did everything they could to block his appointment to the Supreme Court. That is not only hate speech (they hate President Trump with such a passion that anything he does is considered terrible), but also hateful acts and a tossing out of the right of due process. Whatever happened to the principle of "innocent until PROVEN guilty"? I'll tell you: The Democrats and liberals declare you guilty, and you must prove yourself to be innocent. Such are the grapes of hatred.

Two years of an investigation into allegations of a non-crime (collusion) has led the prosecutors into searching for ANY crime. Isn't that not only hate speech, but also hateful acts, if not outright treason for trying to undermine the legally elected President?

Yeah, I know, I use treason too lightly for some people. Too bad, but when anyone does something to overthrow the valid sitting government just for an agenda, I do consider that treason. After all, they are in fact enemies of the nation, are they not?